I figured that if someone was going to shoot high, they would shoot for the moon. Hence I quoted the price of the maxed out laptop.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
AnandTech's Deep Dive Into M1 Pro and M1 Max Highlights Performance and Efficiency Improvements
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This could be true.
The dev I got stats from worked on FPS.
I think that's one of the issues with gaming, that there are multiple subfields, and people in one space frequently insist on speaking as though they speak for the entire community. It may be that "sports" type games better lend themselves to this sort of porting than FPS? And MMORPG are especially problematic insofar as there's kinda a necessity to keep everyone more or less in sync (both literally and as a consequence figuratively).
What I said was not a question that required an answer! It was a rhetorical question as to how the MARKET Apple is addressing views various expansion dimensions.
No-one is denying that some users value the Pro and Max as currently configured. But are those "optimal" configurations, in the sense that Apple would see little interest (not enough to justify the work) in the equivalent of say an M1 Pro but with 4 clusters rather than 2? That's my point -- Apple is feeling their way into how much the market values each of P cores vs GPU vs extra DRAM.
oh, I don’t think they’ll make games exclusive to ATV. Games will have to work everywhere, like it is now.
Rene "The Shill" Richie. He‘s an Apple mouthpiece—-biggest Apple shill on the net and it’s not close.
I am just saying that at a price point of $150, if you have an old controller (to help) will be awesome for less fortunate people...
I rarely watch YouTubers because many YouTubers are not experts (rather the opposite) but just fanboys with little knowledge but lots of viewers.
The issue of quality and file size is usually ignored in such "tests" (many of the "testers" are not even aware that there are differences in the result apart from the speed), although there can be huge differences. They only look at the speed of the encoding. That is all.
It has always been the case that hardware encoders are super fast, but the results (quality, file size) are mediocre to lousy. NVENC seems to be a positive exception.
Of course, you have to compare the hardware encoders against the really good software encoders (i.e. for H.264 you take x264, for H.265 you take x265) and not against mediocre to bad software encoders (typically the stuff that Apple, Adobe & Co include with their Pro software).
These "great" YouTuber have not paid attention even before. Here in the forum, on the other hand, there are people who pay attention.
"Seeing exact same thing. I haven't compared the VT vs x265 quality yet extensively but eye test, the VT version had to be encoded at 8K+ BR to yield comparable quality to x265 which was closer to 2K BR. And of course the resulting 9GB file vs 2.3GB file."
Mac Mini M1 H.265 encoding?
Hey guys, I have big collection of series on iTunes and I would love to convert all H.264 videos to H.265 to shrink my storage. For that reason I'd consider buying Mac Mini M1. To those who already bought it, has someone tried to convert x264 to x265 and tell me how that went? What software did...
forums.macrumors.com
"H.265 (VideoToolbox [= HardwareEncoder])'s quality is significantly worse than the quality of the same size H.264 (x264). But I thought this was to be expected? Note however that I'm on an intel Mac and I can not use the CQ slider. I am forced to use constant bitrate which affects video quality significantly."
Someone please try this H.265 encoding benchmark in Handbrake on their M1 Mac
iOS A-series chips have had hardware H265 encoding for years. I have heard that this hardware acceleration has finally come over to Macs with the new M1 series chips. I would like to ask someone with an M1 Mac to try out the following benchmark: 1. Download the 30MB 720p sample video from here...
forums.macrumors.com
"I think that a visual quality of hardware video encoder (VideoToolBox H.264) in M1 Macs is not great.
I compared a software libx264 encoder (Mac) and NVIDIA Geforce (NVENC) on Windows 10 with the same bitrate or constant quality mode producing almost identical file size.
I see many visual artefacts on a video encoded with VideoToolBox H.264 (1080p 60 fps) 3300K or CQ56. It's especially noticeable on video with animated photo slideshows and blur effect. Too many artefacts. NVENC and libx264 produce much better visual results with the same file size."
Quality of video encoding (VideoTo… | Apple Developer Forums
So if speed is all that matters to you, then hardware encoding is the way to go. If you are also concerned about quality in relation to file size, then the hardware encoder is not necessarily the right choice.
Last edited:
So does your personal opinion invalidate his results that are quantitative and repeatable?
What results? He gets the same "results" as a gazillion other YouTubers. My quarrel is his slavish devotion to Apple. He's little more than a PR flack. It's disgusting and gross.
Want a non-slavish review of Apple products? Go watch Quinn at Snazzy Labs or even read a Gruber review, where he has no problem ripping Apple when they make mistakes. Marco is another one---he has no problems calling Apple out for the legitimate mistakes they make. Hell, Rene Ritchie is STILL telling people how he really liked the butterfly keyboard and how the TouchBar is great (really, go back and watch his reviews).
But he's not a flack or shill? Okay guy. You can go back to your dreamworld of thinking Rene Ritchie is an objective and unbiased reviewer. He's a major, major shill and that's not a "personal opinion."
Results that ignore all relevant aspects except speed in relation to video encoders.
- Quality => ignored
- file size => ignored
- Speed => only this is looked at and then overrated
Therefore, people who know and care about quality and file size do the following:
"I use VideoToolBox only to encode a draft of my videos." (VideoToolBox = HardwareEncoder)
Mac Mini M1 H.265 encoding?
H.264 (x264) on 20% slower than VideoToolBox H.264 GPU encoder, but visual quality is better in x264 encoder. I use VideoToolBox only to encode a draft of my videos.
forums.macrumors.com
I am not even arguing that. My point is his results are repeatable across many sites and reviewers, regardless of your personal opinion of him. Your personal opinion doesn’t invalidate that the M1Pro/ Max offers a paradigm shift for professionals….especially in video editing, rendering, music production or coding. Every single review shows the same massive boost to performance and efficiency allowing the same performance as a $15K desktop machine in a mobile format. This allows not only a productivity boost, but the ability to perform functions on-site with a customer vs in a lab.
These are not aimed at gamers.
Last edited:
You can show me in my comment about Ritchie YOU replied to where I trashed these machines. I trashed Rene Ritchie's character and nothing more.
I never once said you trashed those machines.
Here is the crux of what you said:
Both yourself and another user has implied or directly questioned that his review is biased….as if somehow we shouldn’t pay attention to his results. Another user shifted the goalposts and stated that it wasn’t an effective test because filesize and quality wasn’t compared, again implying that there is bias in his reviews. Renee was quite explicit that he has emulated “his” workflow in video production, so for “him”, he is seeing a massive performance increase. He clearly isn’t interested in filesize or using software encoders to eek out the last little bit of quality just for YT to butcher it on upload. It is not biased just because he didn’t emulate everybody else’s workflow, such as those people who encode their movies at the greatest possible quality for local streaming to their home theatre setup. That IS NOT HIS workflow.
Many other reviewers are saying the same….their workflow performance is hugely improved. I am not sure how that can possibly be classed as biased, when it is a statement of fact.
You are right, but so is the person who said that filesize and quality matter. Renee might find the quality and filesize acceptable himself...
A bit of a silly example, but this is a bit like comparing the MPG (gas) of a motorcycle vs a Toyota Pickup truck. Yes, the efficiency and performance/mile with is better with the motorcycle but that is not the only metric to determine if that is the correct vehicle for my needs.
Now with the M1 Max the quality MIGHT not be as good as pro software (we are still waiting for reviews on that). It could be that the pro software could use and tweak some of the settings to improve the quality while still getting the performance boost from the media chip... it is just too new to know.
However, even if the quality isn't good enough for production level 8k movie compositing, it IS still good enough to run lower quality rough cuts at blazing speeds pretty much previously unavailable on a laptop device. That will save time and money during editing even if the final version is still rendered on dedicated $15k workstation hardware.
The M1 Max is amazing and I bet it is going to change a lot of professional workflows. Ultimately that is what really matters.
I agree 100% and that’s why I didn’t reply to that person. My comment specifically relates to the claim that Renee is somehow biased in his review which gave results based on his workflow. This performance is easily measured and is quantitative. This isn’t Renee’s subjective opinion.
I can’t comment on file size or quality as I have no measure of that. I can’t imagine that the M1 Max is going to be slower than other machines when using software encoders. Everything we know about the CPU and memory bandwidth suggests otherwise.